Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:24800 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 84334 invoked by uid 1010); 21 Jul 2006 01:45:33 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 84319 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2006 01:45:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Jul 2006 01:45:33 -0000 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rasmus@lerdorf.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 204.11.219.139 lerdorf.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from ([204.11.219.139:36950] helo=lerdorf.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.3 r(11751M)) with ESMTP id 0A/3A-29121-BB130C44 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:45:33 -0400 Received: from [192.168.200.106] (c-24-6-5-134.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.6.5.134]) (authenticated bits=0) by lerdorf.com (8.13.7/8.13.7/Debian-1) with ESMTP id k6L1jJH6015166; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:45:19 -0700 Message-ID: <44C031A7.1040005@lerdorf.com> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:45:11 -0700 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Macintosh/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pierre CC: internals@lists.php.net References: <20060719173451.114d4528@pierre-u64> <44BFF61C.2040104@lerdorf.com> <44BFFDC5.1010008@lerdorf.com> <932358188.20060721013717@marcus-boerger.de> <44C02403.8060108@lerdorf.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Adding pecl/zip to 5.2 From: rasmus@lerdorf.com (Rasmus Lerdorf) Pierre wrote: > I reitere my proposal a last time, let fix this issue once and for all > and then I will consider to rename Zip if it is required (no, don't > answer now about that). But without this discussion, I will stay in > the kingdom of freedom, named PECL, et vive le Roi. I'll hold you to the "last time" quote there. The issue has been fixed and I outlined it as clearly as I could. We are not going to go through and reserve names just for the sake of reserving names and thus potentially break existing code. We will choose the best names as we go that best describes the functionality whatever the code does. If users want to make completely certain we won't step on their symbol names, they can use an underscore somewhere in the symbol name or simply use quite explicit names. It's not rocket science. Decision made, please stop bickering. -Rasmus